Menu

TV

Peter Capaldi’s Doctor is one that has divided people somewhat. I’ve heard people call him cold, heartless, and unsympathetic; simply because when another character dies – which tends to happen every episode – the Doctor shows very little empathy, and instead chooses to move on quickly and get on with things. I don’t think he’s any of these things at all, and that actually, some viewers are failing to look into his character a little deeper. Let me tell you why.

We’re nine episodes into the latest season now, and rather fittingly the latest episode subtly shows why anyone who thinks the Doctor is cold is wrong. Without spoiling it too much for those who haven’t watched it yet, Clara basically gets the chance to become the Doctor for the day, as Capaldi is somewhat out of action. Naturally, people die along the way, but does Clara stop and take time to mourn those she’s just lost? No. In fact, at the end of the episode, she’s pretty darn happy with herself, as she believes she did a good job as the Doctor. Again, she doesn’t stop to think about those who have died, she’s too busy patting herself on the back. When she says to the Doctor: “Admit it, I was a good Doctor,” he simply replies: “You were an exceptional Doctor. Being good has nothing to do with it.”

He’s saying that the Doctor isn’t a good person. The Doctor has to be selfish, act fast and therefore move on quickly – even if someone has just died – much like Clara did. Sometimes he even has to kill the ‘monsters’, something which he does not like doing, but often he finds himself in situations where that’s the only choice. Unfortunately, that’s what being a hero is all about – making the difficult choices when no one can, or wants to. However, most of the time, he gives the creature in question the benefit of the doubt. He tries to believe everything is good until it proves otherwise. We’ve seen this from Capaldi’s Doctor in several instances so far.

When Clara played the Doctor for herself, she realised that you have to be emotionally detached in order to succeed, hence why she spend no time getting upset over any of the character’s deaths. She had to be brave. She had to run, in order to save herself, the Doctor and the people who were still alive from the ‘monsters’.

I’m not sure what more people want from the Doctor. When someone dies should he stop? Sit down and make himself a cuppa? Cry? There isn’t time. In a war zone, you cannot stop and sob. You have to pick up your gun and keep fighting until you’re safe. They’ll be time to mourn then. Not only that, but it isn’t in this Doctor’s nature to let his feelings show. He covers them up by making fun of Clara, getting angry and concentrating on the job at hand, but underneath, we all know the Doctor is a lot more complicated than that.

The Doctor is older now. He not some young pretty-boy like Matt Smith or even David Tennant, and this was made very evident in the first episode with Capaldi. It was explained almost straight away that the Doctor wasn’t going to be Clara’s boyfriend anymore, nor is going to hold her hand. In a bid to perhaps distance himself from her, as they were getting too close, the Doctor has given Clara a rough time. This may have caused her to, in one episode, to throw her toys out the Tardis, but would she have been able to play the Doctor for a day if he hadn’t had given this reality check? Probably not.

It’s also important to remember the Doctor isn’t human. The whole reason why he has a companion is because he needs that balance. He needs someone to be empathic, to understand what the innocent bystanders are going through. If he had these emotions himself, there would be no need for him to have any assistants. And quite frankly, that would make for a rather boring Doctor Who.

Essentially, the Doctor – or any character for that matter – can’t be taken at face-value. You need to be able to look at a character a little deeper than “he/she is seems mean and cold”. I actually think Peter Capaldi’s Doctor is extremely well-written, as he’s not just a 2D character. There is a lot more to him than meets the eye, I just wish other Doctor Who fans could see that.

If you’re confused about what 4K TVs are and why they are relevant in today’s world then read on.

I was recently invited to come and visit Sony’s headquarters in the UK where I got a chance to look and play with their latest tech. The most innovative and interesting tech is coming from their TVs and boy, is the world of television about to change.

TV tech has stayed around the same for a good number of years now but exciting changes are finally coming. 4K means there’s four times as many pixels as there is in a full HD TV, that’s over 8 million pixels. It’s a huge difference picture wise which obviously, you can only realise when you see it for yourself. But to give you an idea – I stood in front of an 84″ Sony 4K TV and I couldn’t pick out the pixels. You could comfortably stand (or sit) at no more than two feet away and the picture still looked amazing.

4K also adds a huge amount of depth. Even though the 84″ 4K TV we were shown, worth £25,000, also has 3D built in, Sony said that 3D was the gimmick and 4K was the real next big thing. I agree, and I’m sure that most people who do own a 3D TV would say that they barely use that function. With a 4K image you feel as if you’re looking into the TV, instead of having things come out at you, which is probably what most people would prefer.

Now it’s all well and good saying how nice the picture looks in 4K but what use would you have for such a TV when blu-rays and games aren’t in 4K yet? Well 4K TVs can up-scale current blu-ray discs to almost 4K quality. To prove how well this works we were shown an 84″ 1080p Sharp TV and a Sony 4K TV of the same size. Both TVs played a blu-ray disc from the exact same blu-ray player (the signal was being split between the two) and it was clear the up-scaling really did work. This was also noticeable in images, when the same photo of a Japanese newspaper page was shown on the two TVs, you could clearly read the text on the 4K TV whereas the words were just a blur on the 1080p TV.

The best TV we were shown was a 55″ 4K TV with speakers on either side of screen. This seemed like a downside at first because it made the TV very wide and the speakers sort of draw your eyes away from the screen. When we were demoed how the sound sounded though, we were blown away. It’s something you have to hear for yourself but it sounded better than most surround sound systems, let alone better than any TV. This incredible sound was thanks to something called Magnetic Fluid which was developed by NASA as it’s super conductive. Sony are currently the only brand using it in their speakers, it’s already available in some of their surround sound systems. Magnetic Fluid also allows Sony to make the speakers smaller, which is why they’ve managed to get three speakers on either side of the TV frame. It’s not everyone’s taste look wise, but the sound is so mind-blowing, it’s worth it. Plus this TV was in it’s early stage, the model we saw was hand-built and isn’t the final product.

Sony are working on making 4K TVs more accessible to the general public, with their new range coming out in July this year. It’s unclear how much they will cost (or how much their competitors will charge) but 4K is definitely the future. It may take a while for the rest of technology to catch up, for example 3 minutes worth of 4K video (uncompressed) is 300GB! But the fact that 4K up-scaling can make such a huge difference to your blu-rays and photos, means it’s worth getting one now, if you can afford it.